W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-logic@w3.org > February 2001

Re: universal languages

From: Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Date: Thu, 01 Feb 2001 13:52:26 -0500
To: danbri@w3.org
Cc: timbl@w3.org, horrocks@cs.man.ac.uk, www-rdf-logic@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010201135226Q.pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Subject: Re: universal languages
Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 13:48:52 -0500 (EST)

> On Thu, 1 Feb 2001, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> 
> > From: "Tim Berners-Lee" <timbl@w3.org>
> > Subject: Re: DAMl "Thing" should be Top, Universal class - including concrete types
> > Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 13:15:52 -0500
> >
> > > We are not designing a reasoner. We are making
> > > a universal language which will allow the expression of information
> > > from many [different] systems. When a given system has limited descriptive
> > > power, then its input and output will be limited to a subset of the
> > > language.
> > >
> > > Tim
> >
> >
> > OK. In line with this comment from Tim, let me put forward a proposal for a
> > universal web language.
> >
> >
> > Requirements:
> >
> > The universal web language (UWL) will be able to directly represent the
> > meaning of any statement about any state of affairs that may be made by any
> > application that interacts with the world-wide web.
> >
> > Language:
> >
> > I propose that Montague logic be used as the UWL.
> >
> > Rationale:
> >
> > Montague logic was designed to capture the meaning of natural logic
> > utterances, which should be adequate to represent anything.
> >
> >
> > Any problems with this?
> 
> 
> 
> Sounds great. Can you point me to any software I can download to do useful
> things on the Web with UWL...?
> 
> Dan
> 


Precisely.

peter
Received on Thursday, 1 February 2001 13:53:44 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:52:38 GMT